About your Search

20120928
20121006
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7
to be put in to a situation where you have a government determining somebody who wants to put the idea up on television can't do that. that's one of the things with the campaign finance is that it's what to nay say about democracy is the worst form of government except for the worst form of government. the campaign finance system may not look perfect. when you look at the alternative i don't know they are god either. i don't know if it's a good to have the department of justice to determine he can't run television ads. ic you should be able to do that. i think it's a first amendment right. when you move to the constitutional right it starts getting ugly. >> yeah. we don't -- even or side there's been money in elections for forever. lots of money. going back as long as with can. we can go back to george washington and the night before. there was tails of flying rum and beer and the voice rang out the day 6 election day. how to they got out of the book. there's been money and things in politics for as long as we know. i don't think either side of a necessarily thinks the money itself and ha
surveillance by the federal government and they are challenging the law that allows electronic surveillance, this wiretapping because they're concerned that their case will be picked up. they're claiming to have standing to challenge this law because even though the surveillance might be directed overseas to people they're talking to get their dedication will get picked up in the course of that surveillance and so therefore they have the right to challenge it in court. that is the standing issue we we are dealing with. just to get to the merits for a minute, and the aftermath of the exposÉ in the mid-70's about various abuses in the intelligence community and in short in short is set up a system by which the executive branch would have to go to the court surveillance court here in d.c. and get permission when they wanted to do wiretapping for national security purpose to give sworn intelligence information. this is way of making sure that the court, there was a court that had to check and had a role in reviewing the government's effort to do this wiretapping which they ended up using in in
. and the things you cite with regard to your work with the governor and the state government, those are things you should do. that is part of the job description to be in the united states senator. those are special. as part of the in basket. what we are talking about here is the ability to communicate with the governor, whoever he is, with the rest of the congressional delegation come with other members of congress from around the country to produce positive outcomes. and when i talk to people, what i hear is that there is no real evidence that they and this panel knows me. people around the state know me and they know i have a very different style and that's what we need in washington right now. these guys don't get things done. now i am proud of governor christie. i think he's doing a really good job. we see things often, if not most of the time the same way, but we are very different people. we have different styles, with both of the best interests of the state at heart. >> this'll be a surprise that i'm going to go to transportation. the future of amtrak has still been a political football be
. we had a government shut down. newt gingrich i clinton. once the government shut down, the pressure on both sides was so intense there was a deal in less than three weeks. the pressure, if we go into january, will be far greater than it was then because the economic consequences and the market consequences are more significant. i think it's inconceivable that if we go into january, there won't be a settlement in january, early february at the latest. we hit the debt ceiling in february anyway. there has to be a settlement. somebody has to blink, probably both sides blink to some degree. i've talked a little bit to people in financial markets in new york about how they think the markets would react to all of this. the reaction i've got is there's a lot of nervousness, a lot of volatility in the markets in january. if there is a deal in a few weeks, and any deal clearly makes retroactive to january 1st, the tax cuts continued, and we'll remove sequesteration, then what i'm told is in the interim the damage really won't be that significant. now, for fiscal hawks, many of us have been s
to it that the real debate is about how we get it done and also the nature of the government that is the consequence of how gets them. obviously government will grow. if you shrink the budget the government will retract and that has implications to the budget. it's an ongoing debate always in america but if you think about what has been accomplished in the last year everyone knows we have to solve the problem. how to solve what has resulted in an impasse and, but the fact that everybody agrees it needs to be solved is really the most important thing. >> but it seems to me that it's a math problem and as you said, if you have got you know slow but stable growth for an extended period of time here than ultimately the raponos have to go up and expenditures have to go down. neither of which is particularly healthy in terms of economic growth. if you have taxes going up in the united states and expenditures going down ultimately that has to happen if you are going to solve that math problem in a slow growth while. >> at the same in europe and the same everywhere. we all grew up with spending more money.
networks for the poor in new mexico. i believe if the federal government would have block granted the state of new mexico 43% less money, done away with all the strings and the mandates that i could have effectively overseen the delivery of health care to the poor. i think you apply that same template to medicare, health care for those over 65, get the federal government out of the health care business completely, give it up to the states -- in this case block grants that balance revenu with expenditures -- and that's how we're going to get out of this. we're going to -- giving it up to the states, 50 laboratories of innovation and best practice, i think that's exactly what we will have. we'll have some fabulous success, we'll also have some horrible failure. failure will get avoided, success will get emulated. but that's how we're going to find our way out of this. >> host: gary johnson is joining us from new mexico this morning. he will be with us for about 40 more minutes. we'll put the phone numbers on the bottom of the screen as we take a look at the libertarian nominee and his positio
light on the president's service record. 60 minutes has obtained government documents that indicate mr. bush may have received preferential treatment in the guard after not filling his commitments. >> vote republican and you vote to enable george bush to keep rolling as an emperor, a child emperor. but an emperor. >> i have to tell you, as part of record in this case this election. the feeling most people when they hear barack obama speech, i feel that's going up my leg. i don't have that too often. it's a dramatic event. there's nothing to do with politics and has to do with the guy we have about our country. and that is an objective assessment. >> i read that she once took a psychological test is that the position you are most suited for his undertaker. >> on the bus ride up on the snowy road to lebanon, new hampshire, i showed him this week's "newsweek" off the presses. >> how does this feel of all the honors that have come your way, all the publicity? >> well, i have not seen this. it's quite some pain. you know -- >> what is to make you think of? is very loved one? >> last i were
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7

Terms of Use (31 Dec 2014)